Letters 01.17.2010

I
appreciate Robert Kumpel’s Dec. 13 article about the “Manhattan Declaration.” I
did, however, want to clarify one statement about imperfect legislation that
was attributed to me in the article.

Pope
John Paul’s statements in Evangelium
Vitae address situations where
an elected official, whose pro-life position is clear, might justly support
imperfect legislation that limits the harm done by existing laws. Evangelium Vitae does not suggest, and I did not intend to state, that legislators are
always morally required to support what may be imperfect legislation.

Research
has demonstrated, however, that some of these laws, though modest in their
ability to eliminate abortion, have had a significant impact on reducing the
number of abortions. Such legislation is pro-life in its effect and reflects
the pro-life intentions of the committed legislators and organizations that
sponsor such legislation in efforts to build a culture in which all life is
fully protected and respected.

Of
course, our pro-life efforts will not be complete until all life is sacred and
protected as such under the law.

Most Reverend Joseph Kurtz, D.D.

Archbishop of Louisville, Kentucky

Model for Bishops

Your
photo of Van Dyck’s painting of St. Ambrose forbidding the Emperor Theodosius
from entering the Milan cathedral (“Power and Grace,” Nov. 22) inspired me to
look up the story of this event: In the course of putting down a rebellion, the
emperor had sent his troops to indiscriminately massacre several thousand
people in the city of Thessalonica. After learning of the emperor’s action,
Ambrose, probably not without risking his own life, confronted him on the steps
of the cathedral of Milan, and prohibited him from entering. The very good news
is that, due to Ambrose’s admonition, the emperor thoroughly repented and was
reconciled to the Church.

It
seems to me that this should be a model for bishops dealing with “Catholic”
politicians who support the indiscriminate massacre of more than a million
children every year in the U.S. Ambrose engaged the emperor in “dialogue,” but
only after he had first laid down the law and banned him from entering the
church. The result was a happy one for all: no more massacres, and, best of
all, reconciliation for the sinner.

What
more basic purpose is there to Our Lord’s sacrifice on the cross than
reconciliation of sinners?

Let
the bishops take notice!

Patrick Lahey

Krakow, Poland

John Jay’s Ignorance

I
must first commend my distinguished colleagues for their exceptional collection
of some difficult data to access, namely the number and characteristics of
priest sexual-abuse cases (“John Jay Study Divides Observers,” Dec. 20).

But
I must take issue with their less-than-neutral interpretation of the data. When
80% of the victims are postpubescent males, the sexual contact male-on-male,
and access to girls was not restricted as in a prison environment, it is clear
the acts were homosexual.

Only
an academic can state that homosexual acts do not necessarily make one a
homosexual. That is like saying sexual acts outside of marriage do not
necessarily make one a sinner. It is due to the collective dogma of academia to
treat homosexuality as mainstream that the researchers go out of their way to
disassociate priest homosexual abuse with homosexuality. And, contrary to
[David] Clohessy’s (director of the Survivors’ Network of those Abused by
Priests) belief, the sexual orientation of abusers is relevant for
understanding why these crimes occurred, providing us the knowledge for how
best to prevent future abuse.

So,
let’s call it what it is — homosexuality — and be forthright that homosexual
priests are the cause and begin working to resolve the problem.

Willard M. Oliver

professor of criminal justice

Sam Houston State University

Strengthening Marriage

I
would like to comment on your “Practical Help for Marriage” (Dec. 13) article.

The
programs discussed are all very helpful for couples entering into marriage and
also for sustaining healthy marriages. There are two other Catholic programs
that do not get enough publicity: Marriage Encounter, a Catholic program to enhance
good marriages, and Retrouvaille for troubled marriages. The latter is an
outgrowth of Marriage Encounter in Quebec, thus its French name meaning
“Rediscovery.” Retrouvaille places strong emphasis on the communications
techniques needed to repair marriages in danger of falling apart, including 12
post-weekend sessions. My wife and I have been involved in both programs. The
presenting couples share their deepest joys and hurts, showing by example how
to build a successful marriage. (All the people involved in Marriage Encounter
and Retrouvaille are volunteers). The steps in Marriage Encounter are romance,
disillusionment and joy. In Retrouvaille the steps are romance,
disillusionment, misery and hope. These programs are open to people of all (or
no) faiths. We believe everybody wants and needs a good marriage.

Gerald Hackert

Scottsdale, Arizona

Editor’s note: Sheila Hackert, Gerald’s wife of 55 years, died last August.

Uncharitable Reform

I
appreciated the commentary “When Reform Deforms” (Dec. 20) that became all the
more apt when I realized it was by Steubenville biology teacher Daniel Kuebler.

The
concept of bureaucrat-run health care is not only frightening — it misses the
whole point of Christian teaching regarding the virtue of charity. The act of
freely giving benefits the giver much more than the recipient. Christ
illustrates this in the parable of the widow’s mite, where she freely gives
considerably more than the rich man.

Government-run
programs use their ends to justify their means by forcibly taking money from
citizens (taxes) and claiming that their purpose is to benefit some group of
citizens. By depriving the citizens of the freedom of giving, don’t they also
deprive them of the love that is essential to true charity?

Terry Hornback

Wichita, Kansas

Iconic History

I
read the recent article on “St. Stephen’s Cathedral” (Dec. 20) in Vienna,
Austria. It was a very fine article. I especially enjoyed reading about the
icon of Mariapócs. I visited the village of Mariapócs in Hungary a number of
years ago and saw the icon of Mariapócs in the village church. It is a
Byzantine Catholic Church, and the pastor at the time I visited was a member of
the Basilian Fathers.

The
priest told more of the story of the miraculous icon.

It
seems after the original icon cried in the church of Mariapócs, the emperor
said that the icon should not remain in an obscure village but should be
enshrined in St. Stephen’s Cathedral. When the people heard this, they
immediately had someone paint a copy of the icon, and that is the one that is
still in Mariapócs.

Mariapócs
is still a place of large pilgrimages. The crowds are sometimes so large that
the liturgy is celebrated outdoors.

Father Joseph Vamos

Diocese of Gary, Indiana

Light on the Womb

I
noted with interest the Register’s front-page article entitled “When Human Life
Begins” (Dec. 20). Over the years, a variety of similar articles on this issue
have also been published.

One
such article appeared in California
Medicine, the official
publication of the California Medical Association in September 1970, in which
it urged its physicians not to deny the humanity of the unborn child from
conception since to do so would be “a curious avoidance of scientific fact.”

Moreover,
it is further worth noting that when the Supreme Court handed down the decision
of Roe v. Wade on Jan. 22, 1973, it clearly avoided citing the
scientific humanity of the unborn child from conception, but gave the right of
“privacy” the rationale for legalizing abortion. (The right to privacy is
nowhere mentioned within our federal Constitution.)

Today,
it is an indisputable scientific truth that the unborn child is biologically
human and genetically complete from conception. Significally, with the progress
of modern-day sonograms and DNA, the unborn child can be readily observed as a
light on the womb!

Thomas E. Dennelly

Sayville, New York

Corrections & Clarification

In
our Dec. 13 story “Modern-Day Abolitionists Fight Slavery,” Kristyn Peck
Williams of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Migration and Refugee
Services described the governments of the United States and other countries as
being in the “baby stages” of responding to human trafficking, whereas our
story quoted her as saying these governments were taking “baby steps” and
paraphrased her as “likening it to the early stages of the campaign against
domestic violence.”

Williams
was misquoted in reference to policies that saw trafficking victims housed with
drug addicts. Her reference was to the homeless, not drug addicts.

The
Register regrets the errors.

Williams
was also paraphrased as saying the U.S. government, “after focusing for years
on imported victims … is only now waking up to the reality of domestic
violence.”

Williams
did not use the term “imported,” but the Register believes this is a neutral
and accurate adjective to describe those who are brought into the U.S. under
coercive conditions for economic exploitation. The Register believes the
description of the U.S. as “waking up” conveys the sense of Williams’ comments
that the government’s efforts to address the social-service needs of
trafficking victims focused for several years on victims brought from other
countries. Only recently has it provided programs to address the needs of
domestic victims. Still, we regret any discomfort our choice of words caused
Williams.

A
story on the Books & Education page in the Jan. 3 issue identified the new
president of Thomas More College of Liberal Arts in Merrimack, N.H., as Thomas
Fahey. His name is William Fahey. The Register regrets the error.

Comments

Join the Discussion

We encourage a lively and honest discussion of our content. We ask that charity guide your words.
By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our discussion guidelines.
Comments are published at our discretion. We won’t publish comments that lack charity, are off topic, or are more than 400 words.
Thank you for keeping this forum thoughtful and respectful.